ML20045A765
| ML20045A765 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/14/1992 |
| From: | Selin I, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Brons J POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW YORK |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9306140102 | |
| Download: ML20045A765 (1) | |
Text
ff$
'g
)*
)
~
a o UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
g g
{
r wrem#GToN. D.C.M Blaha t
Murley Beckford EDO R/F October 14, 1992 i
Mr. John C. Brons President and Chief Operating Officer New York Power Authority 123 Main Street t
White Plains, New York 10601
~
Dear Mr. Brons:
Thank you for your letter of september 18, 1992.
I appreciate
'your taking the time to respond to my request and the thoughtful comments you have provided.
I agree with you that classification of safety related components, plant security requirements, and regulatory interactions, are three particularly important areas in which the NRC could improve our regulatory policies and, based on your comments, I have initiated discussions with the NRC staff to spuc additional thoughts on how we can achieve that end.
One of the areas you identified, plant security requirements, is the subject of a policy paper and under Commission consideration.
In the policy paper the staff recommends actions, including changes to the security regulations, that would eliminate or reduce certain security measures that were intended to protect against the insider threat.
Discussions with NUMARC indicate that based on their proposed Alternate Protection Strategy, they consider reductions can be made in security requirements beyond those proposed by the staff.
NUMARC asserted that security reductions based on their Alternate Strategy would allow operators to have less encumbered access around the plant to conduct safety related tasks, thereby enhancing safety.
The Cormission is seriously considering the NUMARC proposals in our deliberation of the policy paper.
The Commission will continue to review our policies in the other areas that you cited'in your letter as well.
We welcome your I
comments both for the essistance they provide in focusing our l
attention on additional areas where unnecessary regulatory burdens may exist and by providing specific examples that we can work with in formulating improvements to the regulatory process.
I hope that our dialogue in this vitally important area will continue.
Sincerely, j
l 1(f ()(j,11 Ivan Selin
}
&$6140102 wee a u d92 o34
,,